DC: Sibley added to list of ballot challengers

Montgomery Blair Sibley, a candidate for President, has brought a quo warranto suit against Barack Obama, arguing that he should be “ousted” from the presidency. A quo warranto petition is made to the courts to ask by what right a person holds office and can be used to remove an office holder who, for example, is ineligible to hold office. The District of Columbia has a statute under which such claims may be presented, but the courts have ruled that only the Attorney General of the United States or the US Attorney for the District of Columbia may bring such suits, as they are the only appropriate representatives of the people.

Sibley presented his objections to Barack Obama’s eligibility to Eric Holder, who of course didn’t file suit against the President. In this action Sibley seeks to press the quo warranto claim action himself, or failing that, to seen a writ of mandamus, an order from the court forcing Holder himself to initiate an action against Obama.

Normally, I wouldn’t have listed this lawsuit as a ballot challenge, but it presents a group of additional claims, one of which is (quoting from the First Amended Petition):

A Writ of Quo Warranto ousting Obama as President of the United States and/or preventing him from holding the franchise of being on the ballot for that office in 2012 insomuch as he is not a “natural born Citizen” of the United States as required by Article II, §1, of the U.S. Constitution.

Mr. Sibley makes a two-pronged claim – first citing Emerich de Vattel in support of a claim that US Presidents must have US citizen parents, and second disputing the President’s birth documentation, largely based on the work of WorldNetDaily volunteer image “experts” including Douglas Vogt and Paul Irey.

Sibley, unsatisfied with the court’s pace in dealing with his claim, filed a writ of mandamus in Circuit seeking to force the District court to Rule. This was denied. The Government has moved (unopposed) to set the deadline for their response for April 2.

Lupin: “Mr. Sibley makes a two-pronged claim – first citing Emerich de Vattel in support of a claim that US Presidents must have US citizen parents…” Say no more. Another bona fide nut who displays his ignorance.

I suppose I could almost understand these birthers not getting the point that Vattel had nothing to do with our definition of Natural Born based “merely” on WKA while the courts were dismissing their suits on standing. But the ballot challenges have actually been telling them that this Vattel stuff is irrelevant B.S. Just how many more times do they have to lose before they start figuring this out?

JoZeppy: I suppose I could almost understand these birthers not getting the point that Vattel had nothing to do with our definition of Natural Born based “merely” on WKA while the courts were dismissing their suits on standing. But the ballot challenges have actually been telling them that this Vattel stuff is irrelevant B.S. Just how many more times do they have to lose before they start figuring this out?

They’ll just plug their ears and scream “OMG CORRUPT COURTS” and mutter to themselves how they’ve got it right and all them fancy pants lawyers and judges with their fancy law degrees and years of experience in the legal field are wrong.

JoZeppy: I suppose I could almost understand these birthers not getting the point that Vattel had nothing to do with our definition of Natural Born based “merely” on WKA while the courts were dismissing their suits on standing.But the ballot challenges have actually been telling them that this Vattel stuff is irrelevant B.S.Just how many more times do they have to lose before they start figuring this out?

Welcome

Obama Conspiracy Theories since 2008 has been your des­tination for conspiracy theories and fringe views about Barack Obama. Having an argu­ment with your buddies at the office? You're in the right place. Use the Search box below or check out our featured articles. If you don't agree with what you see, feel free to add your thoughts to the over 225,000 comments others have left. To leave a comment not on the current articles, visit the Open Thread.

Conspiracies

Conspiracies

Sometimes people leave comments designed to offend or outrage the reader, and invoke a firestorm of protest in response. These are the Internet trolls. Replying to them is feeding them and they will come back for more. Refusing to play their game encourages them to go away.